Democratic Presidential Primaries 2008

[HotHotHeat]

"Distractions" are now at the top of Stephen Colbert's On Notice Chart.

Azure, you're right to in your suggestion that all of Obama's associations and 'elitist' comments need to be challenged. But the degree to which they are analyzed is hilarious. Mass media are the ones pounding this stuff to death, and you're sucking it up. You seem to feel this overwhelming desire to come after Obama for the questionable stuff he's said...Maybe it's because that's where the resistance is coming from, but I sure don't see you questioning other candidates. Granted, Hillary is old news and McCain isn't even in the spotlight. Point is, and both democratic candidates have said this about the other, there is enough dirt out there to attack either of them...And since the republicans can't run for a republican platform (they know they wouldn't get elected), they are going to run against the democratic platform. It's really ironic that the same party that essentially started government in the US is the same party holding it back, but that's another story.

Here's my take on the rural/urban racism stuff, you don't have to agree with it.

Rural people, historically, are less educated. Less educated, historically, makes you more likely to be conservative in your voting. I'll be attacked for making the connection between republicans and racists, because it's certainly not a sweeping ideology among them, but which party would more than likely contain more supporters with racist or white supremacist views? In my opinion, it's republicans, whose voting base is predominantly rural - Save a few states. I'm actually surprised you're so against the idea that rural people are more ethnocentric by nature than are urban people. No one is talking about extreme racist views, just moderate race issues.

And just because some people don't have time to post every 10 minutes in this thread doesn't discount their opinion, or make them 'driveby' posters.

EDIT: Your suggestion that liberal leaning sites are just as bad as liberal leaning ones is outrageous, and you know it.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Sure everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that anyone who supports Bush and at the same time tsk-tsks Obama for being an "elitist" has some sort of mental block.

George W. has lived for 60 years with silver spoons sticking out every hole in his body and had every goddamn thing imaginable handed to him. I'll bet you he's never even been in a house that doesn't have a garage. He's the poster boy for elitism. His picture is beside the word in the dictionary. So to turn around and call the other guy elitist because of some stupid comment about Pennsylvania coal miners just doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by Azure

Again, someone else in this thread said that rural people are more racist and homophobic than urban people.

Yeah, well, it's true. It's obviously true.

Do you think a couple of gay men (married even!) would be more comfortable in downtown Calgary or downtown Cardston? Would a family of Lebanese immigrants on welfare would get a nice warm welcome in Dawson Creek, or would they be better off in Vancouver? Would a black guy and his white wife get more stares and glares in Wetaskiwin or Edmonton?

I'm from Alberta. I've got plenty of rural relatives and I know plenty of rural people and I can flat out say that they are more prone to homophobia and racism than people who live in a big city. If you don't want to believe it then I think you just have blinders on.

And no need to repeat "but there are racists and homophobes all over the place". We know that. It's not the point.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

but I sure don't see you questioning other candidates. Granted, Hillary is old news and McCain isn't even in the spotlight.

And your point is?

I don't support either of the 'other' two, and because Hillary is 'old news', and McCain isn't in the 'spotlight'...which of sort of disagree with, why should I even mention them?

I have said MANY times on CP that I dislike Hillary.

McCain? Well, I don't dislike the guy, but I certainly question some of his policies.

Point is, and both democratic candidates have said this about the other, there is enough dirt out there to attack either of them...And since the republicans can't run for a republican platform (they know they wouldn't get elected), they are going to run against the democratic platform. It's really ironic that the same party that essentially started government in the US is the same party holding it back, but that's another story.

Eh? The Republicans aren't running with a 'conservative' campaign, you know, balanced budget, less government, free rights...etc, etc.... because most of them aren't even conservative. I may have supported Bush in the past, but I still HATE his economic platform. Heck, I hate the economic platform of just about every single candidate running.

Outside of Ron Paul, who actually seems to 'get it.'

Part of 'changing' Washington, is going to be changing the greed that runs rampant amongst ALL politicians. While there is nothing wrong with social programs, right now, they need to be cut back and reformed. Big time. None of the candidates are willing to do that....outside of tweaking the health care system, which IMO, needs a complete overhaul.

And just because some people don't have time to post every 10 minutes in this thread doesn't discount their opinion, or make them 'driveby' posters.

Coming by and telling people they don't know what the hell they're talking about is driveby posting.

And you know it.

EDIT: Your suggestion that liberal leaning sites are just as bad as liberal leaning ones is outrageous, and you know it.

No, its not outrageous. One thing Bingo has always said around here, is that the answer usually lies somewhere in the middle.

Quoting the Huffington Post, or Rush Limbaugh, is certainly not in the middle.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Sure everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that anyone who supports Bush and at the same time tsk-tsks Obama for being an "elitist" has some sort of mental block.

You seem to think any who challenges Obama supports Bush.

Which is strange. I don't support Bush....although I have done so in the past. Heck, the majority of the people in the US don't support him anymore.

Still ridiculous....I don't care who you supported. Obama is coming across as an arrogant person, and needs to be challenged on it.

This has nothing to do with supporting Bush.

George W. has lived for 60 years with silver spoons sticking out every hole in his body and had every goddamn thing imaginable handed to him. I'll bet you he's never even been in a house that doesn't have a garage. He's the poster boy for elitism. His picture is beside the word in the dictionary. So to turn around and call the other guy elitist because of some stupid comment about Pennsylvania coal miners just doesn't make sense.

Again, I don't see what this has to do with Bush.

He isn't running in this election, and frankly I think its stupid that you're trying to deflect the issues facing Obama, onto Bush 'poster boy for elitism.'

[RougeUnderoos]

Aah yes, it's "stupid" to point out that all the blabbermouths who are harping on this one comment and Obama's alleged arrogance and elitism are the same people who supported George W.. The smart thing to do would be to ignore the almost comical hypocrisy in all this.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Aah yes, it's "stupid" to point out that all the blabbermouths who are harping on this one comment and Obama's alleged arrogance and elitism are the same people who supported George W.. The smart thing to do would be to ignore the almost comical hypocrisy in all this.

So, only the people who supported Bush are the ones 'blabbering' on about Obama's proven arrogance?

Why don't you just give it up? Bush has nothing to do with this election. But someone, if Obama loses....I have a feeling people are going to blame Bush.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Aah yes, it's "stupid" to point out that all the blabbermouths who are harping on this one comment and Obama's alleged arrogance and elitism are the same people who supported George W.. The smart thing to do would be to ignore the almost comical hypocrisy in all this.

Even better, it's worth looking at the bios of those talking heads who have levelled this accusation with the most glee: the private prep-school and seminary educated Sean Hannity, or Chris Matthews, who attended a private University and has a graduate degree in economics, or Bill O'Reilly, or any number of the various children of privilege that are the latest shills for the GOP organ that is Fox News. For these guys to call Obama (as Ray Suarez did) a "liberal, latte drinking, volvo drinking elitist" is pretty rich.

We should just be glad we have all those guys around to stand up for the little guy.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

So, only the people who supported Bush are the ones 'blabbering' on about Obama's proven arrogance?

Probably not "only the people", but I'm going to go out on a limb and say "all" the right-wing commentators bitching about this supported Bush.

As for his "proven arrogance", we have the word of your secret friends and one poorly worded (but I'd say somewhat accurate) comment. I don't know if this proof would really hold up under scrutiny.

Originally Posted by Azure

Why don't you just give it up? Bush has nothing to do with this election. But someone, if Obama loses....I have a feeling people are going to blame Bush.

I suppose I should give it up. If you don't see this manufactured "issue" for what it is after all this then there isn't anything else I can say.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

So, only the people who supported Bush are the ones 'blabbering' on about Obama's proven arrogance?

Azure, I'm wondering if I can ask you whether you're aware of a) the full transcript of Obama's remarks and b) the context in which he said them. Firstly, it was a response to a question. Second--his remarks began in this way--a full transcript you're unlikely to get from the talking heads at Fox News.

So, it depends on where you are, but I think it's fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people are most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre...they're misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to 'white working-class don't wanna work -- don't wanna vote for the black guy.' That's...there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it's sort of a race thing. Here's how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long. They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism.
But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What is the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is -- so, we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- to close tax loopholes, you know, roll back the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama's gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we're gonna provide health care for every American.

But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives.

If you really read what he's saying, it's more along the lines of "yes some rural people are less receptive to our message, but here's why their attitude is understandable."

What a monster.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Probably not "only the people", but I'm going to go out on a limb and say "all" the right-wing commentators bitching about this supported Bush.

Naturally.

As for his "proven arrogance", we have the word of your secret friends and one poorly worded (but I'd say somewhat accurate) comment. I don't know if this proof would really hold up under scrutiny.

You can throw the 'typical white people' comment in there too.

I suppose I should give it up. If you don't see this manufactured "issue" for what it is after all this then there isn't anything else I can say.

No, you should give up the part about Bush.

This has nothing to do with him.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Azure, I'm wondering if I can ask you whether you're aware of a) the full transcript of Obama's remarks and b) the context in which he said them. Firstly, it was a response to a question. Second--his remarks began in this way--a full transcript you're unlikely to get from the talking heads at Fox News.


If you really read what he's saying, it's more along the lines of "yes some rural people are less receptive to our message, but here's why their attitude is understandable."

What a monster.

Now you assume I watch Fox News....which I don't.

Nor do I listen to Hannity, or any of the rest of the right-wing talk hosts.

I read his comments, and felt he needed to be challenged on them.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Apparently, there is something wrong with that.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Now you assume I watch Fox News....which I don't.

Nor do I listen to Hannity, or any of the rest of the right-wing talk hosts.

I read his comments, and felt he needed to be challenged on them.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Apparently, there is something wrong with that.

Don't you think the full context might provide some of the answers you're looking for? As for Fox--no disrespect, but they are pretty much the ones leading the charge on this manufactured issue.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Don't you think the full context might provide some of the answers you're looking for? As for Fox--no disrespect, but they are pretty much the ones leading the charge on this manufactured issue.

I'm not saying Fox News isn't leading the charge.....all I'm saying is that I don't watch it, or listen to any of their commentators.

I did read the full context....and I still find it insulting. Just like a lot of other people.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not saying Fox News isn't leading the charge.....all I'm saying is that I don't watch it, or listen to any of their commentators.

I did read the full context....and I still find it insulting. Just like a lot of other people.

Well, if you read what I posted, you are one of only a very few people who know the whole context of Obama's remarks. This whole flap is over one part of his remarks which was divorced from its context and blown out of proportion.

Out of curiosity, which part of what I posted was "insulting"? I find it astonishing that you don't think the context changes the meaning of the remarks considerably.

[badnarik]

To me it sounds like Obama was just talking out of his ass.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Well, if you read what I posted, you are one of only a very few people who know the whole context of Obama's remarks. This whole flap is over one part of his remarks which was divorced from its context and blown out of proportion.

Out of curiosity, which part of what I posted was "insulting"? I find it astonishing that you don't think the context changes the meaning of the remarks considerably.

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them.And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not."

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

He makes a good point in the first paragraph....but its astonishing to me how you don't have a problem with the second part.

Yep, people who aren't like them. Obama should take a hint.

While I don't like Clinton, here is what she had to say....and she's bang on.

"The people of faith I know don't 'cling to' religion because they're bitter."

"People embrace faith not because they are materially poor, but because they are spiritually rich. Our faith is the faith of our parents and our grandparents. It is a fundamental expression of who we are and what we believe."

"I also disagree with Senator Obama's assertion that people in this country 'cling to guns' and have certain attitudes about immigration or trade simply out of frustration. People of all walks of life hunt - and they enjoy doing so because it's an important part of their life, not because they are bitter."

[onetwo_threefour]

What I find most interesting is that the right is leading a PC charge against Barack after making fun of pantywaist PC liberals for the last 25 years. What's most startling is to consider whether Obama's comments might just be true and improtant considerations. Those who feel 'insulted' might not have the experience Obama refers to, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a larger element of truth when looking at the broader populations he's referring to.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yep, people who aren't like them. Obama should take a hint.

What does that mean?

And maybe you can explain to me (perhaps again, I can't remember) what is so "astonishing" about what he said. There are millions of people out there who are gun nuts, religious fundamentalists, anti-immigration people, racists and all the rest. Do they hang on to these beliefs because they are really happy and everything is going great for them?

Maybe, just maybe they really do feel left out. Is that possible?

And if they feel they aren't part of the process, if they don't feel like their voices are heard or concerns addressed then maybe the response is to hang desperately on to what a lot of "mainstream Americans" would consider old-timey, outdated values and fringe ideals. They are not interested in going forward and don't like or trust politicians and they don't want things to change.

I don't know if it's true or not or even if that's what Obama was saying, but that's what I got out of it. It makes sense to me.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

So to recap:

When asked about communicating the democratic message to the rural poor, Obama offers a compassionate explanation for why it historically hasn't made sense to them--and comments that someone in the rust belt who lost their job 25 years ago and has been waiting for someone--anyone--to offer them real solutions to their problems for all that time, might be understandably bitter about it--that's insulting?

Yeesh. Talk about doublespeak. If that's insulting, I can only conclude that there's nothing at all Obama could have said on this issue that would have worked. I'll agree that the "cling to religion and guns" thing was a poor choice of words--but even the most rabid Obama hater has to admit that IN CONTEXT it's not nearly as bad as the media is pretending.

As for Pennsylvanians, it looks like they're too smart for this nonsense anyway, and have decided to make up their own minds. According to the tracking polls this has had absolutely no effect on the race, after all that hand waving.

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What does that mean?

And maybe you can explain to me (perhaps again, I can't remember) what is so "astonishing" about what he said. There are millions of people out there who are gun nuts, religious fundamentalists, anti-immigration people, racists and all the rest. Do they hang on to these beliefs because they are really happy and everything is going great for them?

Maybe, just maybe they really do feel left out. Is that possible?

And if they feel they aren't part of the process, if they don't feel like their voices are heard or concerns addressed then maybe the response is to hang desperately on to what a lot of "mainstream Americans" would consider old-timey, outdated values and fringe ideals. They are not interested in going forward and don't like or trust politicians and they don't want things to change.

I don't know if it's true or not or even if that's what Obama was saying, but that's what I got out of it. It makes sense to me.

Okay that's what I was saying, but I didn't want to type that much at work!